In message <2E4C5460-2528-4C3A-A510-ED7F3D2D2F54(_at_)nominum(_dot_)com>, Ted
Lemon writes
:
On Aug 12, 2014, at 6:09 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Distance, cost and work are among the "other things". I'd also prefer
to be in Minneapolis. If I'm going to be stuck in conference rooms and
miss out on the city I'm in, I'd rather miss out on Minneapolis or
Phoenix, than on Honolulu or Paris.
The reason given for not returning to Minneapolis is that only the core
participants show up, and that cuts into much-needed conference revenue,
making us less self-sufficient. And so we go to cities that get more
attendance. That doesn't have to be Honolulu, but the advantage of
Honolulu is that it's really easy travel from Asia, but still in the
U.S., which apparently is desirable for some attendees.
Well from Australia the number of viable carriers drops significantly
compared to the US mainland. Most of the carriers fly over Hawaii
from Australia rather then to Hawaii. Before the 747 400 Honolulu
was a refueling stop over so everyone stopped there.
Basically just Jetstar and Hawiian Airlines for SYD -> HNL -> SYD
if one can find a seat. (~10 hours direct)
After that it is
SYD -> AKL -> HNL (Air NZ / Hawaiian) 15, 21+ hours
SYD -> SFO -> HNL (United) 20+ hours
SYD -> NAN -> HNL (Fiji Air)
or on the return
HNL -> MEL -> SYD
HNL -> NAN -> SYD
Minneapolis is actually about as easy to get to as Honolulu.
It could be argued that we should figure out some other way to solve this
problem, but I don't know of one, and it is incumbent on those seriously
requesting a change to propose one, and not simply say "this sucks." I
think pretty much everyone understands the "this sucks" part of the
equation, so there's no need to belabor that point.
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka(_at_)isc(_dot_)org